Blizzard Clears Up Layering Tech Misconceptions in Classic WoW

During the Classic WoW AMA, Blizzard cleared up some misconceptions surrounding layering in Classic WoW. In their reply, they reiterate they are committed to reducing layers to one per realm before Phase 2, explain the difficulties of using sharding instead of layering, and discuss the bugs surrounding players randomly transferring to layers for no reason in beta.

Blizzard

I'm so glad you asked this question.

We’ve seen some confusion about layering, both about how it helps support our launch, and how it’s supposed to behave while its active, so I’d like to both speak to it and clear up some misconceptions about it.

First, we’re absolutely committed to reducing to one layer per realm before our second content phase goes live, and the sooner we can get there, the better. The reason we can’t do that initially is that on launch day, everybody will be clustered in the starting zones, and having players so close together causes an exponential drain on server resources. In fact, the same number of players cause more server problems crammed into Northshire than they do spread across all of Elwynn Forest. We expect that even after the first couple of days, we’ll need fewer layers than we need for the initial hours of launch, and our stress tests have confirmed that expectation.

A related concern that was raised during our pre-launch test was that capital cities felt empty, but that only occurred because we left the pre-launch test running two days past its original end date, and we didn’t reduce the number of layers at all during that test. During our launch week, as the players spread out across the world, we’ll monitor activity and reduce layers as necessary, so the world continues to feel full.

Some players have suggested using sharding in low level zones to address launch demand, both because we talked about that at Blizzcon, and because it’s what they’re used to from our modern expansions. Unfortunately, while modern WoW has content designed to work with sharding, WoW Classic does not. The most obvious example of incompatible content is Rexxar’s famously long patrol path, but there are lots of other examples throughout WoW Classic. Since we want all that content to work as it was originally designed, we’ve made sure that every layer is a copy of the entire world, so you can kite Anachronos all the way to Orgrimmar, and you can ride the boat from Ratchet to Booty Bay with the same people alongside you the whole way.

Some players have asked us to use realm caps and login queues to handle the demand, and while those are tools we have at our disposal, we don’t want to rely on them exclusively, because they keep people from playing the game.

One of the most frequently reported problems during our tests was players transferring to a layer for what seemed like no reason. There were several bugs that caused this, and we’re confident we’ve fixed them. At this point, the only thing that should cause you to change layers is accepting an invite from a player on another layer. Additionally, it should always transfer the player who was invited to the layer of the player who invited them.

Nonetheless, after accepting an invite, the layer transfer doesn’t always happen immediately, because we don’t want to transfer you in the middle of combat, or before you get a chance to loot. During our pre-launch test, we saw a few reports of what seemed like random layer transfers, but when we investigated, we realized this was due to us making that transfer delay too long. The delay was so long that players could unintentionally chain one delay into another by starting combat immediately after looting. Because of those reports, we’ve fixed the transfer delay to give you enough time to loot, without being so long that you’re left wondering why you can’t join your friend. We’ll keep an eye on that, and we may decide to reduce it further.

We’ve also seen reports of people transferring suddenly at the entrances to capital cities, which was related to the transfer delays. If you’re waiting to transfer to your friend’s layer, and you enter a capital city, we ignore the delay and transfer you immediately. The long delays were making it more likely that you’d enter a capital with a transfer pending, and now that we’ve reduced the transfer delay, it will be a bit more clear that your transfer was the result of accepting a group invitation.

Regarding PvP, we saw many posts from players wondering if getting invited to a party is a good way to escape from PvP combat. I’m pleased to say there’s actually a separate, longer transfer delay following any PvP combat. We know a lot of world PvP enthusiasts are excited for WoW Classic, and we don’t want the additional layers to feel like they’re robbing you of your kills. When the time comes to withdraw from the fight, you’ll have to escape from your enemies and get to a safe place before you’re able to join your friends on another layer.

I’d also like to clarify how multiple layers work with logout. Early in our stress testing, players reported that logging out and back in would let you hop to a new layer to farm the same mineral or herb node on different layers. That was a bug, and we’ve fixed it. Your layer assignment now persists for a few minutes between logouts, long enough that by the time the game would choose a new layer for you, that node would have respawned on its own anyway.

Комментарий от magicottermew

Комментарий от rezzyk

on 2019-08-20T13:04:30-05:00

Huh. This is the first time I think I've realized that sharding and layering were two different things. Layering sounds neat, is there a reason people prefer sharding over it? I can tell you just today I was doing the world boss in Nazjatar, and when I died and flew back to my corpse I ended up in a different shard where the boss wasn't pulled yet. Not great.

Комментарий от ogyme

on 2019-08-20T13:14:58-05:00

can we have it in french xD ?

Комментарий от Muphrid

on 2019-08-20T13:16:31-05:00

Sharding is more dynamic and can adjust to maintain a roughly constant density of players. The devs specifically said that layers are entire copies of the world, and no matter where you go, you're always in the same layer unless you accept an invite from someone in another layer. That means some areas will be very low density while others are higher.

With sharding, high density zones are adjusted to have more shards, while low density zones have fewer shards (or aren't sharded at all). This is more resource efficient, which is good for performance, and it ensures you can find other players in nearly any zone, even ones that are seldom visited like Exodar.

Based on the devs' explanation, they would shard classic at launch if they could, but some gameplay elements in classic specifically cross zone boundaries, so it's impractical.

Комментарий от BigBadDad

on 2019-08-20T13:42:54-05:00

I wish retail had layering instead of sharding.

Комментарий от Karille

on 2019-08-20T13:45:57-05:00

I suppose one reason one might prefer sharding is that it tries re-balance the players frequently and in situations where some areas are packed it can be useful. I think it is more often that it's not that people prefer sharding, but it's people like you who either didn't know there is a difference or just don't fully understand it. Most enthusiast are going to be against both. Layering from what I see here is going to be required to prevent a case of having an absolute massive amount of people between the 6 starter zones on each server.

Комментарий от JonnyBeetle

on 2019-08-20T13:46:06-05:00

The same people that complain about layering are the same people that would complain about queues and caps anyway

Комментарий от KnuteOle

on 2019-08-20T14:10:56-05:00

The same people that complain about layering are the same people that would complain about queues and caps anyway

Pretty much.

Layering is a smart, temporary solution that few people will remember after awhile. Without it, gameplay would be virtually impossible for everyone. With it, the game is more manageable and playable.

Комментарий от fordagame

on 2019-08-20T14:12:36-05:00

Actually sharding is much better than Layering. In general realms doesn't have any real purpose. This is most likely legacy concept of how WoW had worked in 2005. At that year, most likely they didn't find any way to create one server where whole community can play together. With time they have merged low populated realms in one (if someone still remember this times). But what advantage does realms give us? -Realm is actually server. It is much easier to put different copy of WoW on every server instead of merging them. One server can't support infinity number of players, so sooner or later you need another realm.-If you put everyone in same zone at the same time, actually it will be very hard to play the game. For sure if zone is overpopulated, it will be pretty unpleasant experience. It will be like traveling in full bus :).-If some nasty alliance/horde kill you, you will find him on exactly same place when you come to collect your body.Disadvantages: -If there is some faction imbalance, there is no way to fix.-Comunitty is split. And you may not be able to play with someone with who you want to play.-With more people, there is better chance that you will find party for content which is outdated (old zones, quests, dungeons and etc).-Over populated servers will have queue when new content is released.

Sharding actually fix all of this problems. When technology and Blizzard evolves they have find solution how to have different servers, but to share the game with all players. Actually servers now are used only to host game for players, not to split them (as it should be). Actually it is pretty outdated approach to split people by servers this days.-You can finally bring all players together. -If you need to find someone for old zones/quests/dungeons, you can search through whole WoW community.-You already dont care on which realm are your friends.-Realms can hold as much people as is capacity of all servers and it doesn't matter on which realm you are.-If I understand it correctly, shards can actually even phase part of some zone in order to manage balance of people in it. This is far better, than to experience lag or to not have enough mobs to kill in order to do your quests. For example see what is happening with Battle for Nazjatar. It is lag fest, because sharding actually should expand to whole zone and to put too much player in the zone in order to create the battle.Unsolved problems?:-Guilds are still binded by realm. This more or less was solved with communities-Economy is per realm. Actually I think that both this problems are caused by legacy issues, because most likely if they merge economy on all realms, will cause a lot of side effects. As a beginning poor realms will be poorer, while rich realms will be richer. It is easier to leave it be like it is now, than to break whole game.

For me actually right now the problem is not in sharding concept. Most likely it is either bugs in code or some "not communicated features". I really believe that for example sharding is favoring alliance right now and try to put more alliance than hordes in order to simulate, that this faction is not dead (but this is my speculation of course). As well most likely there are some bugs with changing of shards without reason.

The main difference between sharding and layering is that layering are same sharding, but per realm. So if layering was bugged, most likely similar bugs exists on sharding. Unfortunately maybe classic is not suitable for sharding at all, not like layering is better approach for it.

Комментарий от Muffpotter

on 2019-08-20T14:47:34-05:00

I really believe that for example sharding is favoring alliance right now and try to put more alliance than hordes in order to simulate, that this faction is not dead

If that were true than it would actually favor the Horde just as much. If you funnel all Alliance into one shard that means all Horde will have their own shards too, making it even more obvious to a Horde player that Alliance is outnumbered.

The Battle for Nazjatar is actually an excellent example for why sharding is not a good system. Your side is loosing? Just hop onto another shard and get a free win.

All the issues you listed with the old realm system weren't fixed with sharding, they were just turned into "non-issues". It's like having your car break down, so you take the bus to work instead. Your car is still broken.

I've said this before, but all Blizz has been doing for the past 15 years is find solutions to problems caused by solutions to problems caused by solutions to problems.I hope classic will make the retail devs take a step back and find a different way to iterate the game other than just piling half-working systems on top of half-working systems.

Комментарий от Lionhearte0

on 2019-08-20T14:58:53-05:00

The only reason I'm against layering is because it literally shifts half the community around and makes them invisible. In a game where community is central (y'know, the MMO part) it's antithetical to the core of what made WoW great if you're unable to see half your realm, especially during the critical early stages of leveling when everyone is near each other and working toward the same quests.

Комментарий от Aerensiniac

on 2019-08-20T15:04:32-05:00

Then you are not looking or reading properly.Sharding and layering are the exact same thing, with layer being only larger shards.The difference is that retail is being run on confetti size shards and layering is attempting to run on something that is at least a billboard, but the thing is: Until we are not reduced to 1 single layer, we will be still in sharding mode.Might be extremely large shards, but it will be shards never the less.

The notion that sharding and layering are two totally different things is simply wrong.

Комментарий от crushburn

on 2019-08-20T15:36:29-05:00

Layering and Sharding is different not completely but they are different.

Layering:1 ServerMultiple copies of the same zone with players from this 1 Server.

Sharding:Multiple ServersMultiple copies of a Zone with people from multiple Servers.

Комментарий от Muffpotter

on 2019-08-20T16:22:55-05:00

The only reason I'm against layering is because it literally shifts half the community around and makes them invisible. In a game where community is central (y'know, the MMO part) it's antithetical to the core of what made WoW great if you're unable to see half your realm, especially during the critical early stages of leveling when everyone is near each other and working toward the same quests.

The alternative to layering is putting everyone above the cap in the queue. So either way, you won't be seeing half of the realm's population. But with layering, at least they are able to play.

Either that or have a dozen extra servers of which half are dead by the end of the year. And as someone who used to play on a dead server, I can tell you that even merging several empty realms won't save anything.

Комментарий от PaladinWat

on 2019-08-20T17:03:20-05:00

Excellent clarification post that should allay most concerns about layering at launch

Комментарий от Tigerus

on 2019-08-20T17:47:09-05:00

i'm sad that blizz needs to explain such obvious thingshow do you imagine doing quests when you are fighting over single wolf with 50k other people?

Комментарий от NotAWoWAcctAdmin

on 2019-08-20T18:52:28-05:00

The way this post is written, and the language and vocabulary used, makes me feel like sending my CV to Blizzard.

Speaking of politics, I'd suggest Blizzard moved their HQ to Switzerland. The situation in America isn't really they video-game-friendly.

Iceland's minimum wage is not higher than Blizzard CM wages. The cost of living in California is higher in certain areas might make that difficult for that specific region. Perhaps they could telecommute from elsewhere if Blizzard, Activision-Blizzard that is, allowed it. As for video game friendliness, don't believe everything you read online or from the media.

Комментарий от vlaka

on 2019-08-20T23:57:15-05:00

yet pservers handled thousands of players without this %^&*ty cop out gimmick

Комментарий от ChunkyCoffee

on 2019-08-21T02:58:27-05:00

yet pservers handled thousands of players without this %^&*ty cop out gimmick

Private servers probably didn't have thousands of players all loading into the same exact spot because they aren't an official server having an official launch day.